Ethical Theories in Islam By Majid Fakhry. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991, 230 pp.

Abstract

The most striking element of Majid Fakhry's Ethical Theories in Islam is its reminder of the intellectual and philosophical dynamism that characterized Muslim scholarship during the late Umayyad and 'Abbasid periods. No discussion was too small or considered taboo. Rather, the search for truth took on many manifestations, ranging from the strict ethical logic of the Mu'tazilites to the philosophical contemplations of Fakhr al Um al Raz1. All are recounted in Fakhry's primer, which may be considered a f me summary for students of Islamic ethics and also a good introduction for western ethicists. Not only might many myths be dispelled, but west­ern ethicists may find striking similarities between this discourse, which took place ill the Islamic world centuries ago, and the one that took place in Europe hundreds of years later.

Fakhry sets out his task clearly in the introduction:
An ethical theory is a reasoned account of the nature and grounds of right actions and decisions and the principles underlying the claim that they are morally commendable or reprehensible. 

Thus, the term ethical concepts must be defined and our discrimina­tions between right and wrong justified. The Qur'an, despite its centrality in Muslim intellectual and philosophical contemplation, contains no ethi­cal theories per se. It does, however, provide an "Islamic ethos."
Fakhry limits the list of those who developed an Islamic view of the universe and humanity's place in it to those who practiced Qur'anic exege­sis (tafs7r), jurisprudence (fiqh), and scholastic theology (kalam). As for the Sufis (mystics) and philosophers, Fakhry argues that too much "extrane­ous" influence colored their view for their arguments to be considered thor­oughly Islamic. Whether th.is is true or not is, of course, still debatable. It is also outside the author's field of concern, for his task is not to prove as much as it is to describe, which he does tenaciously and admirably.
The central debate revolves around two approaches to theology: the Mu'tazilite and the Ash'arite. The Mu'tazilite position will be the most familiar to students from the western tradition as it is based largely on a metaphorical interpretation of the Qur'an to support positions influenced by the Hellenistic trend. Th.is was possible largely because of the remark­able work done in translating ancient Greek philosophical works into Arabic during the ninth and tenth centuries.
The Mu'tazilites argued that human beings were free agents responsi­ble to a just God. The Qur'an abounds with verses reminding humanity of its responsibility and the consequences of failing to act within that context. However, if God were to be fair in His judgment of humanity, individual human beings had to have the capacity to distinguish right from wrong. In addition, the category of justice had to be objective if God were to judge all of humanity for its actions. Although elements of justice could be pro­ pounded in a divinely inspired revelation bestowed upon a prophet, human beings could still be expected to recognize the rightness of an act whether it was revealed or not. In other words, the Mu'tazilite view considered nat­ural reason a source of spiritual and ethical knowledge.
According to the Mu'tazilites, this reason-based knowledge exists as a universal guidance provided to all humanity and helps human beings rec­ognize the truth revealed through revelation and prophethood. Once they ...